If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Just started FarCry 3 as well, while finishing off Sacrifice. I'm with the people who dislike the hunting, mainly as it's just a crafting system (and worse, pretty much a non-optional crafting system) and those are not for me. I can see the game is going to be lots of fun once I have all the things that I would have liked to start with (like being able to carry more than one weapon) but I resent having to put several hours into the game to search for wildlife in order to reach that point. Especially as pirates are scattered all over the place so me chasing down a goat can quickly lead me into a hail of AK fire.

And fuck everything about no-quicksaving. Whoever thought that was a good idea is now titled Prick Extraordinaire.

It's early days yet but I still prefer FC2 and I don't see that changing. In FC2 my HUD was clean, my map was real, and I didn't have to make progressively bigger diamond holders. The shooting was the same quality and, while I like the stealth of the new game, the stealth in FC2 was more rewarding and felt more realistic.

to this

Originally Posted by Casimir Effect

OT: Well FarCry 3 is fantastic and acts as an excellent counterpoint to FarCry 2, easily my GOTY for 2012(although the list of 2012 games I've played can be counted on one hand). The only bad part of the game so far is all the UPlay bollocks that infects it.
And that no one calls me china.

Makes me all warm and fuzzy inside. :D

Far Cry 3 is indeed superb.

Originally Posted by vinraith

Oh come now, you've got to expand on that!

Can't speak for Casimir but I think what he means is that they both stand alone.

I mentioned upthread that FC3 feels more like Far Cry 2.5, and I stand by that. It feels like Far Cry 2 but with a few mods attached to give it some extra 'oomph'.

I've now played both, and I like both. There are things I like better about Far Cry 2 (the setting, weapon degradation, diamond hunting, the map, the buddy system) and there are things I like better about Far Cry 3 (the stealth, the non-respawning checkpoints, hostile wildlife, corner-leaning, friendly AI).

Mash them together and I'd never need to play another game. Roll on Far Cry 4!

Hah, and here I thought I could get away with only sounding highbrow. Fair enough, for me it goes a little something like this...

FarCry 2 was all about atmosphere, immersion and making your own story.
You were always in 1st person, you almost always had control of your character, your map was part of the world, your HUD was hidden as standard while minimalized otherwise; there was little in the gameworld to draw you out.
As for the world itself, it felt so real. That Africa, which combined all forms of native terrain into each 50km^2 map, was better than any meticulously-crafted, modern warfare, Middle Eastern town. The way the sun would rise and set, the way the wind would suddenly get up, the long grasses and the open deserts, the animals, roads, towns, settlements, checkpoints, bridges, everything just felt right. The fact you spent so much time with the map in your hand meant that you could find your way around that place after only a few hours; that and the missions sending you all over while none of the map was locked away.
The story wasn't anything special in itself and merely let you know how dangerous the place was, and how little compassion existed in it. But by being so open, hostile and undefined, you were encouraged to make your own tales. And there were never any scripted moments to overshadow your own.

FarCry 3 is about the gameplay, now linked to stories and characters. The gameplay has taken the solid, often unforgiving foundation from FarCry 2 and expanded on it; increasing realism in some places (scope sway) while losing it in others (stealth). It also adds great little touches like inbuilt peeking over/round cover with guns There's now more gamey elements, like racing sidequests and various challenges. such as you'd see in AssCreed and GTA games. Everything in FC2 worked towards your overcoming the main missions whereas now there's entirely unrelated stuff which provides an outlet for playing in the game (eg. racing). The gamey elements are compounded by the RPG XP skill system, which promises to allow for and so encourage the player to try some really cool things - like multiple takedowns.
The story and characters now provide a constant impetous for moving forward, and perform the usual task of allowing a large gameworld to be introduced slowly. They also mean the introduction of some more scripted elements which ensure big gunfights and tense moments occur, which I find good if there is a story as anticlimaxes are rarely appreciated in gaming (eg. ME3 and the big, bad boss that was "Marauder Shields").

The games still overlap in many ways, with the core being how the shooting feels and how the majority of the world is ungoverned by scripting. If you want a lighter experience, I reckon FC3 will be perfect in delivering a large sandbox for playing in where you can approach objective in a number of ways. If you want something deadly, intimate and fierce, nothing compares to putting FC2 on Infamous, turning off the music, throwing on some headphones and diving into Africa.

People dislike him? I thought he was the perfect final boss for that game.

I have no recollection of that. What I do remember is being enormously relieved that there was no gimmick boss fight at the end of the game. People bitch about the ending, but for me the nadir of the ME series is that god-awful reaper fight with the tracking cannon.

@Casimir

Thanks for the extended and detailed answer. I'm still trying to figure out if FC3 is worth a go. I'll probably pick it up at some later point (too much to play right now, WAY too much to play) but the compare/contrast is very helpful since FC2 was one of my all-time favorite FPS's.

I have no recollection of that. What I do remember is being enormously relieved that there was no gimmick boss fight at the end of the game. People bitch about the ending, but for me the nadir of the ME series is that god-awful reaper fight with the tracking cannon.

I have always assumed that the point in that Reaper fight was to be deliberately really irritating and unappealing to replay it if the cutscene that follows it doesn't turn out the way you like.

I have always assumed that the point in that Reaper fight was to be deliberately really irritating and unappealing to replay it if the cutscene that follows it doesn't turn out the way you like.

Which is why it was particularly unwelcome that the dialog options in the scene that follow it are so badly flagged. I had to replay the conversation, and thus the damned boss fight, three times to get my character to say what I wanted her to say the first time. The other two times she decided to murder all the Quarians for reasons I can't fathom. Mind you, it's not like I was trying to get some perfect ending, either, I just wanted her to kill the damned Geth and be done with it.

I knew the fun was there but it's been finding out the crafting system didn't go the way I dreaded that has made the difference. I imagined it to be one of these systems which allows you to advance as the story progresses - you can only craft X from Y once you get to the part of the story where you can find Y. This was especially depressing seeing as number of weapons carried starts at 1 and relies on crafting. But within 2 hours I had 3 weapon slots open, and within the next hour I'd killed some sharks and gotten the 4th. Since then I've noticed things less and the crafting has taken a backseat, going from something I need to actively do to something I do in passing - as I find new things to kill/harvest.
You have to realise that while an outlier for most FarCry 3 was/is a big deal for me. FC2 is my favourite FPS of all time, and after Hocking left and FC2 was slammed by non-critics I expected to be disappointed - a feeling that wasn't helped by all the tooltips and RPG elements the game throws at you in the first 30mins. Now that the game has settled down and elt me find my stride though, I am immeasurably happy with it.

Originally Posted by NathanH

People dislike him? I thought he was the perfect final boss for that game.

Originally Posted by vinraith

I have no recollection of that. What I do remember is being enormously relieved that there was no gimmick boss fight at the end of the game. People bitch about the ending, but for me the nadir of the ME series is that god-awful reaper fight with the tracking cannon.

I had no problem with there being no final boss, never been a fan of boss fights. And while I wasn't enthralled by the standard ME3 ending I was satisfied with the Extended Cut ending. But I know it was a point of contention for many as from what I can tell, like requiring stories to always be apocalyptic in nature, the majority of people need some big fight to end a story - a dragon-slaying moment. I just want a satisfying ending though, which ME3 gave me.
That reaper fight was awful though, I'll happily agree with you on that. Who thinks that sort of fisticuffs feels epic?

Originally Posted by vinraith

Thanks for the extended and detailed answer. I'm still trying to figure out if FC3 is worth a go. I'll probably pick it up at some later point (too much to play right now, WAY too much to play) but the compare/contrast is very helpful since FC2 was one of my all-time favorite FPS's.

Sorry about the length of the reply - FC2 is one of those games that gets me all verbose, partially because it gets so much vitriolic hate thrown at it. I only picked up FC3 so soon because I got in on that Gamestop Impulse mistake, and now I feel guilty for paying so little. I'll remedy that through some DLC, or accept that the five copies of FC2 I've bought in one way or another make up for it.

I have been playing Mass Effect, the original. I even like the elevators, they add character and a sense of scale. I've spent so much time doing the side quests in the Citadel, I've got my ship after an evening of gameplay, it was fun.

I have been playing Mass Effect, the original. I even like the elevators, they add character and a sense of scale. I've spent so much time doing the side quests in the Citadel, I've got my ship after an evening of gameplay, it was fun.

Elevatortalk was great, too bad they removed them for the next two games.

@Casimir
Thanks for the extended and detailed answer. I'm still trying to figure out if FC3 is worth a go. I'll probably pick it up at some later point (too much to play right now, WAY too much to play) but the compare/contrast is very helpful since FC2 was one of my all-time favorite FPS's.

I think Casimir's reply is great and I don't mean to take anything away from it, but I would urge you to exercise some caution. Far Cry 2 is my all-time favourite shooter, and FC3 was pretty horrendous for me. It has improved in some areas, notably the spawning issue, and stealth is better if a bit overpowered - you can easily clear most outposts stealthily, sometimes without firing a bullet. This does lead to a certain sameiness in dealing with the outposts (the main modifier being, 'is an animal present or not?') if you get sucked into approaching them in the same way, which can happen.

The outpost missions are the best thing about the game, after that you have: 160 collectibles to pick up, 24 assassination missions where you mostly have to 'kill X with a knife', 19 time trial racing missions, 23 hunting missions (don't know what these are like but the one I did was 'kill 5 dogs with a shotgun'), 18 radio towers to unlock (this involves climbing a staircase and some ropes each time, I can't figure out what it adds to the game), and some other busywork. If that is your thing then go for it, and they have done all these things pretty well, to the extent of making them quite compulsive (have to unlock all the towers!) and in my view, it's a cynical game.

The rest of the game is the campaign, which is terrible both from a story point of view, and a gameplay point of view. Escape burning building, hold off enemies with mounted gun, shoot ten enemies with sniper rifle, lots of fetch quests.

That said, most people love it, so this may just muddy the waters slightly!

I knew the fun was there but it's been finding out the crafting system didn't go the way I dreaded that has made the difference. I imagined it to be one of these systems which allows you to advance as the story progresses - you can only craft X from Y once you get to the part of the story where you can find Y. This was especially depressing seeing as number of weapons carried starts at 1 and relies on crafting. But within 2 hours I had 3 weapon slots open, and within the next hour I'd killed some sharks and gotten the 4th. Since then I've noticed things less and the crafting has taken a backseat, going from something I need to actively do to something I do in passing - as I find new things to kill/harvest.

That was my problem with crafting in Far Cry 3 - I never use consumables in videogames if I can avoid it(and in FC3 you very much can) so the entire crafting thing was just an one-time deal - get what you need, make all the best stuff, done and done for the rest of the game. And even if you do like to OD on syringes, they are crafted from plants, not animal skins. So the entire hunting aspect of the game lasts only until you get all the best(or near-best, since the best is usually tied to a quest that is tied to a region) things, which really doesn't take long, especially when you know what you're doing.

Speaking of Far Cry 3, I guess I gave up on it a week ago, even though it still sits on my HDD... I am sitting at 7 radio towers and 11 missions, and the game just started to feel like a chore. Picking up all the items and idols is a pain, and my OCD forces me to do so, and enemies are far too derpy for camps to be of any challenge, even on the highest difficulty level(which I'm playing at) - You can simply snipe them all with an AMS and then move two bushes away when they start to rush, repeat until victory. The story did not exactly grab my balls, and I am disappointed by the villain so far - the "definition of insanity" videos were a great setup, and what we got in the end is just a money-hungry punk(admittely he might go more crazy later in the storyline after failing to kill whatshisname few more times).

What the game really needs is no fucking minimap showing everything(just remove it) and no loot maps to be bought from the shop. Then maybe the exploration would be, you know, exploration and not just following the quest compass to nearest loot.

It would also very likely make the money more valuable, because as it is, it's worth nothing - you don't need to buy guns except for the signature ones, you never need to buy ammo, and I ended up buying every map, every paintjob for a gun, and some extra guns and I'm still overflowing with money. And it's not even half the game yet.

The rest of the game is the campaign, which is terrible both from a story point of view, and a gameplay point of view. Escape burning building, hold off enemies with mounted gun, shoot ten enemies with sniper rifle, lots of fetch quests.

Thanks for the comments, and I can see where you're coming from. For me the thing is that I expect FC3 to be far shorter than FC2 and am entirely okay with that. I already have a big, 40+ hour game to get lost in and that's FC2. In FC3 I'll be ignoring lots of the activities as they sound like ,as you say, busywork. I'm going to play the game as a concise experience where story missions are broken up by clearing outposts, climbing towers and exploring the world.

Originally Posted by Mohorovicic

Speaking of Far Cry 3, I guess I gave up on it a week ago, even though it still sits on my HDD... I am sitting at 7 radio towers and 11 missions, and the game just started to feel like a chore. Picking up all the items and idols is a pain, and my OCD forces me to do so, and enemies are far too derpy for camps to be of any challenge, even on the highest difficulty level(which I'm playing at) - You can simply snipe them all with an AMS and then move two bushes away when they start to rush, repeat until victory.

The thing I'd say to this applies to the other quote as well, and it's that - like FC2 - you get out of FC3 what you put in to it. In FC2 as soon as I get access to the Dragonuv that's pretty much game over - if I want to I can take the whole thing apart on any difficulty in comparatively little time. And by the sound of it there are equivalent ways to destroy FC3. But if you want the challenge, then it's an easy matter to try and restrict yourself. I did a playthrough of FC2 never touching a sniper rifle and had a great time, although sweet jesus the SPAS-12 in that game couldn't hit water if it fell off a boat. I was halfway through one where I used the Fortunes weapons only, and that was tricky to say the least. FC3 has even more weapons and a far better melee system (good fallback), so I can only imagine the ways that you could play through that game especially with the skill system as well. You have to make your difficulty somewhat, as on open-world game featuring sniper rifles is always hard to balance.

Can someone give me hint how to parry weapon,i know its LT but i kinda can't get it right -.-

Time it better! It needs to be just as they make contact and it should happen automatically. Some attacks can't be parried but they're fairly obvious to guess most of the time. You also can't parry with the big shields.

Time it better! It needs to be just as they make contact and it should happen automatically. Some attacks can't be parried but they're fairly obvious to guess most of the time. You also can't parry with the big shields.

Yes you need to get stabbed in the face a hundred times to get the timing just right but you'll get it eventually and when you do, the world is a wonderful place.